Mess with your minds: A wind powered craft going faster than a tail wind speed.

[electrodacus]

Well, it could be heat or some other change in the potential energy of the wreckage of the car.  Anyhow, lets say the wall is in fact on frictionless rollers and is very heavy (say 100,000kg).  And presume a completely non-elastic collision. Are you saying that after the collision the 9Ws energy will be found as kinetic energy of the now very slowly moving wall?   

Yes that is exactly what I'm saying because that is what happens.
The 100 tone wall will move so slow that it will be hard to see and on top of that any real wheel able to handle that weight will have so large friction that those 9Ws will be wasted there super fast so wall will stop moving.
But in the ideal case where wheels will have no friction the wall will continue to move slowly

And the fulcrum will supply a reaction force equal to the sum of both forces.  Same for the wheels.  You really are refuting Newton's laws!   

Sorry you are unable to get this not sure how to explain this better to you.

[electrodacus]

And that, my dear, is exactly why you should start to question yourself if you in fact are such a supreme person that knows everything MUCH better than ALL OTHER, or, maybe, just maybe, you could be wrong ?

I will have questioned myself if you (any of you) provided me with an explanation that worked and did not violate the energy conservation law.

[bdunham7]

I will have questioned myself if you (any of you) provided me with an explanation that worked and did not violate the energy conservation law.

'

I believe this was asked before and I don't think you answered (just link it if you did).

What is the energy conservation law you are referring to?  Can you state the law fully?

[electrodacus]

The G wheel is a generator. It only needs to turn on its axle to generate power, it doesn't need to move. Since the belt is moving it can turn the G wheel to generate power without the cart needing to move left or right. The power generated by the G wheel can be transferred to the M wheel, and as noted before, the M wheel can turn clockwise or anti-clockwise at any speed according to gearing. If we gear it to turn clockwise it can move the cart from left to right. With low gearing it can move the cart slowly, and this slow movement will require less power than was generated in the G wheel.

That is where the misunderstanding is.
The wheel if it had no friction will spin at same speed as the treadmill and so stay in the same place but no energy is extracted.
If the wheel is locked 0RPM then vehicle will move to the left at same speed as the treadmill.
If you are in between this two extreme cases so extraction energy from the wheel and putting part of it in to motor wheel to push the vehicle back will result in a slower movement from right to left as that is the only direction this vehicle can go if the only source of energy is the treadmill.
That is why I always say braking power or braking energy as that is what it happens to generator wheel.
Same way you are able to brake an EV by generating energy and put that in to vehicle battery.

[electrodacus]

I believe this was asked before and I don't think you answered (just link it if you did).

What is the energy conservation law you are referring to?  Can you state the law fully?

You can not create or destroy energy you can just convert it from one form to another.
So when you take 10Ws from the vehicle kinetic energy slowing the vehicle down you need to put all that back else end result will be a slower moving vehicle.
So if you take 10Ws from wheel and put only 7Ws in to propeller then you will end up with less speed and some heat from friction losses.

[bdunham7]

You can not create or destroy energy you can just convert it from one form to another.

OK, so in what way have any of the examples or calculations I have proposed violated this statement of the law of conservation of energy?

[electrodacus]

OK, so in what way have any of the examples or calculations I have proposed violated this statement of the law of conservation of energy?

I do not have that much time to make a list but check all my old reply's.

[bdunham7]

I do not have that much time to make a list but check all my old reply's.

Oh please!  You haven't shown that any of my examples purport to create or destroy energy.  If you are 'busy', just point out one.

[IanB]

If you are in between this two extreme cases so extraction energy from the wheel and putting part of it in to motor wheel to push the vehicle back will result in a slower movement from right to left as that is the only direction this vehicle can go if the only source of energy is the treadmill.

It cannot move from right to left as the powered motor wheel is turning clockwise and moving it from left to right.

[electrodacus]

If you are in between this two extreme cases so extraction energy from the wheel and putting part of it in to motor wheel to push the vehicle back will result in a slower movement from right to left as that is the only direction this vehicle can go if the only source of energy is the treadmill.

It cannot move from right to left as the powered motor wheel is turning clockwise and moving it from left to right.

You are ignoring the fact that power at the motor is lower in real life than power at generator and this powers are opposite.

[electrodacus]

The ones left here start to become boring. So I will not be back here for some time. Maybe I will be back some time latter to see if you learned something new.

[IanB]

You are ignoring the fact that power at the motor is lower in real life than power at generator and this powers are opposite.

No, I'm not ignoring this. Only very little power is needed by the motor for the M wheel to turn slowly.

You can understand this if we brake the M wheel so it cannot turn. In this case the cart will not move, but the brake also requires zero power while the generator produces lots of power. Now we can take just a little power from the generator to make the M wheel start turning.

[electrodacus]

You are ignoring the fact that power at the motor is lower in real life than power at generator and this powers are opposite.

No, I'm not ignoring this. Only very little power is needed by the motor for the M wheel to turn slowly.

You can understand this if we brake the M wheel so it cannot turn. In this case the cart will not move, but the brake also requires zero power while the generator produces lots of power. Now we can take just a little power from the generator to make the M wheel start turning.

There is no mechanism to brake the motor wheel that will be sniping freely if not connected to G wheel.  On the small treadmill model the wheel and propeller are directly connected and there is no brake. On the large Blackbird there is a freewheel so that propeller can not turn the wheel only the other way around.
In neither of this cases there is any brake. Not that will even be feasible in air (how will you break against air ? With a large parachute?).
You can counteract the movement made by generator with both the motor and propeller but you need to use energy and since energy available is lower than that from generator vehicle will move in the direction that you do not want (right to left).

[Brumby]

The ones left here start to become boring.

You mean threatening of your beliefs.  (It's not science, because you refuse to look at the physics objectively.  You have your preconceptions and you won't even consider exploring any possibility that disagrees with those.)

So I will not be back here for some time.

Yeah, I'd run away now if I were you.

Maybe I will be back some time latter to see if you learned something new.

Maybe if you come back we will see if you have learned something new.



My money is on "No".

[Labrat101]

Hi I am Back..
I was racking my brains how to explain how this is Possible  .
First clear your minds and think of a Bumblebee .. Ok you say this is off topic . well not really.
According to all known laws of aviation, there is no way that a bee should be able to fly. Its wings are too small to get its fat little body off the ground. The bee, of course, flies anyway. Because bees don't care what humans think is impossible.  Yes you ..
That this machine can go faster than the tail wind for only very short time . because .
The wind first pushes it upto the tail wind speed .
Now comes the tricky part . First the wind MUST NOT CHANGE SPEED at the point of acceleration . HARD as wind is variable .
The propeller pitch is changed to the right angle ( those who missed that part in the video watch again) .
now at this moment there is no longer wind pushing from the back . Only from the front . when travelling at the same wind speed .
an air pocket is forming at the front of the machine . Which is at a LOWER air pressure vacuum bubble .  That is rotating round the front in a
kind of whirlpool the centre is now acting like a vacuum suction . The air resistance will drop so there is a state where there is no longer any
front air  drag slowing it down . The Propeller still has air flow & ground power . but the friction lose is smaller .
This is when their Red marker flag moved backwards .
This is the point it enters the Air vortex tunnel . and starts to get sucked as well as the tip velocity of the propeller is at its highest .
and is Now Blowing . Houston we have Go for acceleration .
This will only last while the tail wind remains constant  maybe minute or 2 or just seconds .
When the tail wind speed changes the front air pocked is broken .
The point is it is possible maybe only for short times maybe a few minutes on a good day.
World records have been beaten in micro seconds . So I reckon a minute is a   

[Kleinstein]

Hi I am Back..
I was racking my brains how to explain how this is Possible  .
First clear your minds and think of a Bumblebee .. Ok you say this is off topic . well not really.
According to all known laws of aviation, there is no way that a bee should be able to fly. Its wings are too small to get its fat little body off the ground. The bee, of course, flies anyway. Because bees don't care what humans think is impossible.  Yes you ..
That this machine can go faster than the tail wind for only very short time . because .
The wind first pushes it upto the tail wind speed .
Now comes the tricky part . First the wind MUST NOT CHANGE SPEED at the point of acceleration . HARD as wind is variable .
The propeller pitch is changed to the right angle ( those who missed that part in the video watch again) .
now at this moment there is no longer wind pushing from the back . Only from the front . when travelling at the same wind speed .
an air pocket is forming at the front of the machine . Which is at a LOWER air pressure vacuum bubble .  That is rotating round the front in a
kind of whirlpool the centre is now acting like a vacuum suction . The air resistance will drop so there is a state where there is no longer any
front air  drag slowing it down . The Propeller still has air flow & ground power . but the friction lose is smaller .
This is when their Red marker flag moved backwards .
This is the point it enters the Air vortex tunnel . and starts to get sucked as well as the tip velocity of the propeller is at its highest .
and is Now Blowing . Houston we have Go for acceleration .
This will only last while the tail wind remains constant  maybe minute or 2 or just seconds .
When the tail wind speed changes the front air pocked is broken .
The point is it is possible maybe only for short times maybe a few minutes on a good day.
World records have been beaten in micro seconds . So I reckon a minute is a   

The point with the bumble-bee is a good one.

However the rest of the explaination is way to complicated and leads to wrong conclusions.
To understand the effect, better just irgnore electrodacus - too many false claims on his side and making things more complicated than they are.

There was an adjustment of the prop, but this was just to optimize the vehicle. Onece a working setting of the prop is found, the backbrid should work fine and reach a speed faster than wind with a constant setting, starting from a low speed or stand still. There was no change in prop during the runs on the treadmill.
Some fine adjustment may help to find the highest speed - for the given wind speed.

The whole effect can be understood in steady state (so all speeds are constand). Thus no need for energy storage.

The wheels dirve the prop and the prop drives the vehicle relative to the air.
The question that remains is if (and under which conditions) the wheels can generate enough power from the given thrust (force) of the propeller to power the propeller. With more power available from the wheels the vehicle can go faster than the wind, with less power it can not - at least not in this way. From the theoretical side this is simple, even though the result may be confusing to some and some may not be able to understand.
It may look like it could violate the conservation of ernergy, but it is not.

We consider the case moving at the speed of the wind:
The prop sees effectively zero air speed.
The power needed by the prop to generate a fixed amount of thrust is independent of the wind speed.
The power the generator can produce is force ( thrust from the prop) times vehicle speed relative to the ground.
The speed relative to the ground is wind-speed.

There is a constant power required and an available power proportional to the wind speed.
So with enough wind speed the wheels can provide more power than needed to drive the prop. The excess power can be used to more the vehicle faster, that is faster than the wind.

The technical realization still need a good prop and low friction to keep the power lossed. So it needs a well trimmed system, with the prop not trying to go to fast.

[Labrat101]

Yes .. The propeller pitch adjustment by hand is really dumb luck to do it manually by an unskilled driver . This should have been done by
a better method .
I was Not using "" electrodacus ""  idea . I saw how this was possible on my first comment .
I can visualize this mentally  photographic memory . Which I said I find it hard to explain how it all fits together & works .
This whole project should have be done in a proper wind tunnel where ALL the variables can be set and monitored .
with a smoke over . So it could be filmed and then this would solve the argument . But on the other hand other EEvbloger would not
have had the Opportunity to energize their Brains .

NO BumbleBee's were hurt or used In Bug Splat tests ..

 

[Psi]

Couldn't this easily be proven or disproven using a miniature wind tunnel and small version?

I guess the length of the tunnel required would be a bit long.

[Kleinstein]

The experiment with the treadmill is the controles environment "wind tunnel" replacement, just with a different system of reference.

[Labrat101]

Couldn't this easily be proven or disproven using a miniature wind tunnel and small version?

I guess the length of the tunnel required would be a bit long.

Properly yes as long as the model scaling was exact to the original .
The wind tunnel would still need a wind source to replicate real time wind air flow and Not some cheap house hold fan .
Wind tunnel fan /Props are special designed and balanced . Then you would have to put in all the monitoring sensors and be
calibrated to known standards .
These guys won a 10k bet . They should have used some of this money to rent / borrow a tunnel for an hour or so .

[Labrat101]

The experiment with the treadmill is the controles environment "wind tunnel" replacement, just with a different system of reference.

No .. Not the same .. you just contradicted your self from a previous post .

[Psi]

That was my point, not everyone agrees that a treadmill is a valid analog.
So a wind tunnel seems like the only way to convince those people.

[Labrat101]

That was my point, not everyone agrees that a treadmill is a valid analog.
So a wind tunnel seems like the only way to convince those people.

. There seems to be a fixation on treadmills etc.
I will give a just a few reasons why they are not used other than exercising the Dog .
First they have a very high friction as the belt runs over the rollers the surface gets warm to hot .
the bottom of the belt that hangs down at the bottom has to be loose . So it flaps .
Having to moving surfaces running in parallel in opposite directions causes side air distortion  and turbulence.   .
Even at airports they did away with this due to belts getting hot . Now they use just rolling beds .. Belt-less.
In other places the belts were replaced with slated belts that were self cooling ..
The aerospace industry , Lockheed , NASA , and all the others .
Don't use this in a wind tunnels or for replacing the use of a wind tunnel due to there significance and disturbance in testing.
The test item in a wind tunnel is usably suspended . in the car test rollers are used and the wheels are placed between 2  controlled
rollers . 2 at the front and 2 at the back . and are computer controlled . The rollers are covered by a plate so no other side effects
mess with the final tests .

Treadmills etc work great on paper and for demonstrating  science projects . And not to for get the GYM .
or moving lots of odd shaped stuff from containers etc .
So Please get over the treadmill . .. hamsters likes them .

[Psi]

Don't get me wrong, i think the effect is real and that the treadmill is showing the effect in action.

But if the treadmill demo doesn't convince some people then it's best to find some other way to demonstrate it, rather than arguing back and forward that the treadmill does in fact prove it.

[Brumby]

. There seems to be a fixation on treadmills etc.

That's because a treadmill is a convenient mechanism to demonstrate the principle.  This is because of the validity of the concept of "Frames of reference".

I will give a just a few reasons why they are not used other than exercising the Dog .

This will be entertaining....

First they have a very high friction as the belt runs over the rollers the surface gets warm to hot .

So?  How does that affect things?

the bottom of the belt that hangs down at the bottom has to be loose . So it flaps .

So?  How does that affect things?

Having to moving surfaces running in parallel in opposite directions causes side air distortion  and turbulence.   .

So?  As a factor that is somewhat minimal, how does that affect things?

Even at airports they did away with this due to belts getting hot . Now they use just rolling beds .. Belt-less.
In other places the belts were replaced with slated belts that were self cooling ..

So?  The temperature of belts is not going to affect the experiment unless they've burst into flames or gone so tacky as to be unable to allow rolling.  This is a non-argument.

The aerospace industry , Lockheed , NASA , and all the others .
Don't use this in a wind tunnels or for replacing the use of a wind tunnel due to there significance and disturbance in testing.

Don't see this being significant for the scale of test we are talking about.

The test item in a wind tunnel is usably suspended . in the car test rollers are used and the wheels are placed between 2  controlled
rollers . 2 at the front and 2 at the back . and are computer controlled . The rollers are covered by a plate so no other side effects
mess with the final tests .

OK.  Fine.  The rollers are a perfect analogy for travelling over the ground (Just as a treadmill belt is, BTW) - but the only thing is that they constrain the movement of the wheels.  In such an experiment, the rollers would need to be programmed to increase speed to match the performance of the vehicle, while the wind speed remains constant.

Do that and you'll find the Blackbird does work.

Treadmills etc work great on paper and for demonstrating  science projects . And not to for get the GYM .
or moving lots of odd shaped stuff from containers etc .
So Please get over the treadmill . .. hamsters likes them .

OK - a dismissive wave of the hand and it all goes away...?  That is classic denial.